.257 Weatherby vs. Whitetail Deer

[Cowboygunsmith]

It has been intresting reading and as a new person (as of today) I see a lot of information being passed on this subject. I don't know a lot but I think the question here is what are you trying to do? Each weapon we shoot has been built and designed to do a specific thing. And from having listened to Roy Weatherby when talking with a friends grandfather as a kid he stated the best cal. he ever produced for hunting was the 257 as it could be used on anything up to the big bears at 300 yds or under. He felt the power mixed with the recoil made it the best weapon for the average hunter. Now I know people who are doing long range hunting such as you are not average as you can make shots with confidence where the average person can only hope to accomplish. As the old man (Don Smith) would say if you want to shoot more led (weight) then get a bigger weapon designed to shoot more led. But there is a price for more led and speed (recoil). Have fun and enjoy your hunting trip.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Yeah, I usually go WAY back in the woods when I do hunt management areas.

With the gun thing...how far off will disassembly & reassembly throw my boresighting?

Just curious?

I don't have a bore-sighter, that's why I ask?

I used to work in a hunting store, which was really nice and convenient...because I had any and every tool I could possibly need, readily available!

Then they went out of business, and now I don't have access, except for the few specialty gunsmithing tools that I can afford.

Which a boresighter, and a nice, sturdy vise, & assembly table, etc...are not part of my equipment selection, yet...

Nor is a reloading setup...which would probably be a ****-good investment since my ammo costs me about $60-$70 a box!

 

[roninflag]

i would like to see the comparison of a remington sendero .264 and the weatherby accumark .257. by someone who reloads and put an 8.5-25 or equivalent on each. roninflag

 

[MudRunner2005]

I've been told the .264 Rem is one of the best medium game...as well as I was told the same about the .257 Weatherby, and the .25-06.

However, I was told that that .257 Weatherby was a little bit "badder" than the others b/c it's classified as a Magnum caliber.


I am NOT sure if this is fact of not.....but this is what I've been told.

 

[Quarter Round]

Raining out so I might as well follow this thread.

Cowboy> agreed if you want more you need more lead and bigger bore.

Ronin> the .264 caliber is an excellent caliber. I believe the two would be close with the .257 bowing to a 6.5 RemMag or a .264 WinMan in the heavier weights above 120gr.

Slayer> Shouldn't affect your bore sight adjustment, unless your remove the scope. You will still need to sight it in.
Magnum?? Magnum is marketing hype namaclature and not tied to a performance level to my knowledge. Although in recent years many knowledgeable riflemen/wildcatters/gunsmiths have a undefined expected level of performance for the magnum title.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Sounds good Charles.

I know I will still need to sight my gun in...c'mone...I'm not a total idiot...just a moderate one! Hahahaha!!!!

I just wasn't thinking.

I always thought the word "magnum" meant it had a larger brass casing which held more powder and was capable of withstanding higher pressures than a standard caliber???

That's what I've always though......but once again.....personal speculation.

 

[Buano]

Hey Jim,

I know what you and Charles are saying...the MAIN reason I was wanting a 140gr. projectile, was because it WOULD slow the bullet down, 'causing more "brute-force" / "smack" on initial impact.

Whitties are faily thin-skinned game, yall know this...I was just wanting to take a .257 Wby, and basically make it have the terminal impact of a .308 Win., when it impacts the deer!

A slower/heavier bullet only beats a faster bullet in one measure on the kill, and that's in penetration. Since penetration of a whitetail is never a problem with a .257, going heavy would be giving up what the .257 is good at. Stick to 110-115 grain bullets & drop deer farther than most would dare try. 700 yards should be well within the range of this rifle.

 

[MudRunner2005]

700 yards? 500 will be the most i will be shooting my .257 Wby. I have the 7mmSTW for anything beyond. It really loves those 160gr Accubonds.

Its not capable right now since my funds are limited so i cant buy that 8-32x NightForce ive had my eye on for a while.

 

[600BP]

If you decide to reload for it, try the 100gr triple shock. I know some say it isn't enough to do the job. But, the first animal I shot with it was a large mulie at a pretty close to 400yds., quartering away. Pin hole going in, and literally blew the off side apart on the exit. I have pushed those 100 grainers into the 3700fps range and still retained great groups. RL22 is the powder of choice in my markV. Best of luck.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Thanks for the info. My Accumark loves eating those 110 Accubonds. They were more than enough to drop a whitetail with no problems.

My current problem im having is finding a Remington 700 LSS in .257 Wby, or a Mark-V Deluxe Sporter. The reason being is my Accumark is way too heavy to carry in your hands for long walks through rough terrain. It weighs in around 12-15 pounds with the scope and all on it. It gets hefty after a while, plus the lightweight Mark-V Deluxe Sporter is smaller and more maneuverable.

Anybody have one for sale? LOL

 

[Hired Gun]

I'd say you must have some "stuff" on it. I run Leupold VX3 8.5-25x50 LRT scopes on my Accumarks and they weigh in right at 10.5 pounds on my postal scale. I like the 110 Accubonds too. Weatherby makes a really nice ultra light weight rifle in 257Wby. Thats the way I would go if i needed a lighter rig.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Well, im running a Zeiss Conquest 3-12x56 30mm tube, Harris extendable bi-pod, and a butt-stock shell holder holding 9 rounds and a butler creek sling. It might not be 12-15, but it gets friggin heavy after several miles of treckin around in nasty wet red clay roads.

I definitely would like to get a lightweight version for hunts i cant ride the 4-wheeler deep into the woods, or if i have to carry my climber with me.

 

[sp6x6]

Pull your stock and weigh it, my wood one was 32oz.I got a Lonewolf at 16oz. Try a Snipepod, 4-6 oz. depending on model,not as sturdy as a Harris, but works well, take a little time on set up, get rid of the shell holder on rifle, use it in rig or 4 wheeler, but get a belt model for your pack, easier on back than neck or shoulders.look at lighter scope mnt? Those 3 main items should gain you 2-3 #'s

 

[Buano]

Well, im running a Zeiss Conquest 3-12x56 30mm tube, Harris extendable bi-pod, and a butt-stock shell holder holding 9 rounds and a butler creek sling. It might not be 12-15, but it gets friggin heavy after several miles of treckin around in nasty wet red clay roads.

I definitely would like to get a lightweight version for hunts i cant ride the 4-wheeler deep into the woods, or if i have to carry my climber with me.

Only one question, "Why?".

A 56 mm scope is nice for shooting 2 hours after sunset, but a quality 50 mm objective lens will carry you past legal shooting time at much less weight. I would NEVER put a 56 mm on a cary rifle (unless I was hunting coyotes at night).

So, you have 5 rounds in the rifle & 9 on the side of the stock? And you are hunting WHAT? I have used 3 rounds in 1 day deer hunting, but I had 3 deer to butcher. I've never seen a responsible hunter go through more than 5 rifle shells in 1 day on a big-game hunt. Assuming you are hunting big game, and not blowing limbs off trees when you get bored, why so many shells? Shells are heavy. Leave the extra ammunition in camp or at home. If you are varmint hunting you may need more ammunition, but only cary what you need.

Talley ultra-light mounts are as secure as mounts weighing 3-times as much. For a cary rifle, light makes sense. (Talley rings are also pre-lapped so they do not need lapping unless your alignment isn't perfect.)

I see many people over-gunned and/or over scoped when they try to create the "perfect rifle" instead of the "perfect rifle for THIS application". To some degree I've made that mistake a few times but I'll do my best to never make that mistake again.